Republican Board of Supervisors Has a Precedent

In the , I drew some parallels between the 1991 and 2011 elections in Loudoun County. Some similarities:

• Republicans won overwhelming victories in the races, taking eight of nine seats in 1991 and sweeping all nine seats in 2011.
• Candidates for Chairman George Barton (1991) and Scott York (2011) defeated their opponents in all eight election districts, giving them a very strong hand to lead the new board.
• In each year, the county was feeling the effects of a severe economic downturn that had led to layoffs in the county workforce in previous years.
• In 1991, as in 2011, several newly elected board members expressed interest in replacing the county’s Department of Economic Development with a quasi-independent economic development authority.
• In both years, incoming board members seemed determined to contain, if not reduce, the level of funding for the school system.

There were also some key differences between 1991 and 2011.

In 1991, the county workforce was headed by an Acting County Administrator – Kirby Bowers, who had been appointed on an interim basis following the retirement of longtime County Administrator Phil Bolen the previous year. Bowers was in a tenuous position, working with a new board majority that associated him with the old regime they had pledged to change.

Bowers gradually won over the board by guiding them through an extremely challenging budget process in the early months of 1992. He was awarded the position on a permanent basis that June.

Still, the Barton board did not give Bowers and his staff its full trust. It established the position of Inspector General to report directly to the board and serve as an independent watchdog of the county government. Bert Schreibstein was hired as Inspector General, and served in that capacity into the next board’s term.

The Barton board also appointed a citizens’ commission to study and make recommendations on many key areas of the county government. Similarly, one of the new board’s first actions was to establish a government reform commission to look at ways of making the county government more efficient, cost effective, transparent and “user friendly.”

From my perspective as a member of the county staff in 1991, it seemed that the newly elected Board members assuming office in 1992 had a more hostile view of the county government than those of today. It was commonly said then that government itself was the problem, and that the county government should be run more like a business.

Some board members of that era viewed county employees with distrust if not outright disdain, and appeared to relish the prospect and even the process of eliminating public services and laying off staff members.

Antipathy toward staff is not apparent among the supervisors elected in 2011 – at least not yet. Current County Administrator Tim Hemstreet succeeded Bowers more than two years ago. He has had time to establish his own track record, and appears to have forged a solid relationship with York heading into 2012. At Tuesday’s meeting, several board members made a point of thanking staff for their assistance.

The Barton Board ultimately decided to keep the economic development function housed in the county government, where it was under the direct control of the board. It will be interesting to see if the new board ultimately will be willing to cede power in this area to an independent economic development authority. 

It appears that most of the new board members intend to govern like a corporate board, with a strong emphasis on economic development and less time spent debating legislation than previous boards. But those intentions could be diverted if social conservatives see an opening to put their stamp on county programs.

The majority of the Barton board could be described as pro-business, Chamber of Commerce Republicans. Only Supervisors Charles D. Grant and Steve Whitener would have been considered strong social conservatives. However, that board spent more time and energy dealing with social issues than some of its members would have liked.

For example, the Barton board appointed a majority of social conservatives to the Library Board of Trustees, and the library board went on to pursue a controversial agenda that eventually led to litigation and brought Loudoun County unwanted notoriety.

If the new board similarly gets sidetracked by controversial social issues, it may find that its efforts to promote economic development suffer.

The board will face such a test soon when it revisits the policy regarding holiday displays, and will likely receive pressure to allow selected religious displays on the courthouse lawn.